http://www.betterfarming.com/archive/2003/nov03-3.htm

November 2003 http://www.betterfarming.com/archive/2003/nov03-3.htm

BEHIND THE LINES

Humans are often passionate about the animals they deal with in their daily lives, as well they should be. It takes special skills and dedication to raise livestock and poultry, and these domesticated creatures depend on humans to a large degree for their well-being. It's no big surprise, then, that humans are equally passionate about how they perceive other humans to be treating their animals. What may be surprising is how strongly held personal opinions animal welfare can be so different.

We found ourselves caught up in that passion as we developed this month's cover story, "The Case of the Limping Boar" The story is both compelling and disturbing for a number of reasons.

Humane societies have a growing role in dealing with farm animals. Most Humane Societies are affiliated with the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA) and their agents carry some awesome powers to enter property and lay charges against those responsible for animals. There is a tremendous potential for conflict there, especially on the edges of urban areas where sensibilities of different groups collide.

Some farm observers see this as a continuation of the conflict between rural and urban attitudes. The non-farm rural dweller versus commercial farmer "interface" has been the bane of larger-scale livestock operators when urbanites become upset by odours from livestock and barns. As this story reveals, this conflict has moved to another level; now it's an issue of how animals are raised, with the SPCAs in Canada looking to broaden their mandates and bring heavier penalties against those who neglect or abuse animals.

As our magazine was being completed the OSPCA issued a press release announcing criminal charges against high-profile seedstock producer Jim Long and others involved with Wood Lynn Farms. Despite dozens of attempts over several weeks we were unable to connect with Long. He finally called as this magazine was going to press --and after his situation had become the focus of international media attention.

Long vehemently denies the charges but questions whether he can get a fair trial in light of the publicity and a general lack of understanding of modern agriculture.

He points to position statements on the OSPCA website as evidence that organization wants an end to current livestock production methods in Ontario and wants to halt exports for slaughter.

Long describes the OSPCA press release about him as "a fundraising letter," and "in my opinion libelous." "It's all about money," he argues.

The thousands of dead pigs cited by OSPCA were being composted Long explains. Noting that a receiver was involved in the operation, he insists none of the pigs under his control lacked feed.

In lighter vein, we would like to note that Contributing editor Owen Roberts and his fellow minstrels, Rob Hannam of Monsanto, Len Kahn of AdFarm and Doug Larson of the University of Guelph were runners-up in the Canada's Outdoor Farm Show song-writing competition. You can hear their song, "Over 30 Million Served," on the Internet at: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~owen/songs/

Cover - November 2003

THE CASE OF THE LIMPING PIG Wendell Palmer's 13-month battle with the Humane Society

When humane society officials descended on his farm and a ministry vet ordered his prize boar shot, this former biology teacher and animal care specialist was horrified and furious. His case may be symptomatic of the uneasy and sometimes ugly relations that can exist between humane societies and livestock farmers

by DON STONEMAN

When local Humane Society officials looking for animals in distress descended on his 35-acre farm in Niagara Falls last April with a search warrant, Wendell Palmer thought little of it. He assumed he would be able to show their veterinarian around his barn and that would be the end of it. What happened instead haunts Palmer to this day.

Ann Godkin, an Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food veterinary scientist who had been engaged by humane societies in Niagara Falls and Welland to look at Palmer's animals, ordered that an 800-pound English Large Black boar, a rare breed, be destroyed immediately, along with a couple of ewes.

"I started begging for their lives," Palmer told Better Farming. "I said that the boar might be needed for breeding in two or three days when my sow returns (in estrus). But they said, 'No, no, it's gotta be now.'" And when Palmer asked if he could call his vet to get a second opinion, he says that Godkin refused, insisting "No, no, I'm the vet. We're not waiting."

Palmer's version of events differs from that of Humane Society officials differ. Don Horvath, manager of the local Niagara Falls Humane Society, who was one of the humane society officials present, says Palmer had every right to call in his own vet to make a decision on whether the boar needed to be destroyed. Palmer wonders if Horvath was within earshot when he conversed with Godkin. He admits to being "in a fog" at the time. There were five Humane Society officials present, plus a police officer, while Palmer was alone.

"I lost the battle to save their lives," Palmer says. "I figured it was my duty now to facilitate what they were going to do." The best he could do was to negotiate for the two sheep to go to a slaughterhouse the next day in order to salvage the meat. Unable to save his boar, Palmer waited outside the barn while the police officer attempted to dispatch it with his standard issue .40-calibre handgun.

"After four or five shots and some thrashing around, I went in," says Palmer. "(The boar) was standing there in the corner with a nosebleed. The stupid asses were shooting him through the nose. They had no clue, not a clue where his brain was.

"There was some more shooting and thrashing around and every time he was shot he would run to the other end of the pen and not go down. I said, 'Listen, let me direct the shots here.' Besides, the humane society people and the vet buggered off, just buggered off. And I heard them say, 'No, he's not suffering. He's stunned,' or something like that. Three-quarters of an hour later, when I cut his throat, he was flinching. Something that flinches isn't stunned."

Palmer says that at some point while the boar was being put down, someone called for a shotgun to be delivered from Niagara Falls, a 20-minute drive away. An unmarked police car, "apparently with the shotgun," arrived at the same time as he walked out of the barn after killing the boar.

A report Palmer obtained from the Niagara Regional Police Service information and privacy unit, says "attending officer PCA. Knevel fired 17 rounds while attempting to put down the boar." Constable Knevel's incident report, dated Apr. 22, states that "at the request of Godkin and the SPCA along with the approval of the owner, police assisted in putting down the animal by firing several shots from (a) police-issued 40 calibre handgun."

Palmer says it is "absolutely not true" that he gave his approval. " I argued for 15-20 minutes that he didn't need killing; that I wanted to call my veterinarian for a second opinion on his condition."

For her part, Godkin refused to discuss the incident when Better Farming called her recently, claiming that the case belonged to the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA). "There are two sides to every story. I am absolutely not going to get into debating his (Palmer's) issues there."

Michael Draper, senior investigator at the OSPCA in Newmarket, wouldn't answer questions either about whether Palmer had the right to bring his own veterinarian into the picture. "It would be inappropriate to discuss it. Mr. Palmer can speak his mind. If it is under investigation, we can't speak of it publicly."

Draper did say that a veterinarian, not an agent or an inspector, has the authority to order an animal to be put down. Alternatively, an animal can be put down "with the owners consent."

Is there a waiver to be signed by the owner to that effect? "There is a form normally," Draper says, "The legislation (the OSPCA Act) doesn't speak to that having to be in writing." Nor does the act prescribe methods for destroying an animal, Draper says.

Second opinion warranted

In 2002, the OSPCA and its 32 affiliated humane societies investigated just over 15,000 reports of possible abuse of animals across the province in 2002, of which 1,184 related to food animals. In 2001, there were 840 food animal-related calls.

The OSPCA officially supports federal Bill C-10B, a new animal welfare law permitting tougher penalties for those who abuse or neglect animals. Some aspects of this bill, which has bounced back and forth between the House of Commons and the Senate for some time, worry farm groups. (See accompanying story)

The incident at Palmer's farm on April 22 is illustrative of broad concerns about how humane societies operate in rural Ontario. In researching this article, Better Farming heard a number of complaints that illustrate the uneasy and sometimes ugly relations between humane societies and livestock farmers. There is also disagreement among veterinarians about how animals should be handled. The vets who work regularly on Palmer's farm, for example, disagree with Godkin's decision to put down the boar and sheep.

Dr. Bob Perry of the Dunnville Veterinary Clinic visited Palmer's farm a few hours after the boar shooting. "The boar appeared to be in reasonable body condition," Perry says. The ewes had "old injuries that had healed out of place. They had difficulty walking but would not be in pain."

A second opinion was warranted, says Dr. Scott Reid, who works at the same clinic as Perry and regularly treats animals on Palmer's farm. A week after the boar shooting, humane society agents presented Palmer with a list of 45 orders to be attended to on the farm regarding the health of animals. One of the 45 "orders" issued to Palmer after the boar shooting says, "The horses/pony must not be housed in pens or pastures/paddocks that have unsafe materials kept in them (e.g. loose wire, building materials, discarded farm equipment, etc.)."

Incensed, Palmer called Reid in. "I didn't find anything wrong" on the farm, Reid says. Moreover, the manner in which the boar was put down bothers him. "I think it was inhumane," Reid says. "Euthanasia is supposed to be about gentle death."

An effort should have been made to call in an "experienced veterinarian," sedate the pig and then give it an overdose of anesthetic to kill it, asserts Reid, who certifies farms for Ontario Pork's Certified Quality Assurance program.

He favours lethal injection over use of a firearm. The blood associated with shooting and cutting arteries is very upsetting for the owner, he says. Furthermore, firearms are risky. "Using a gun in a crowded area with humane society officers and police officers was very dangerous. Someone could have been killed by a ricochet."

Shooting animals can be done humanely, Reid says, "but you have to know exactly how and where to shoot." If a gunshot is to be used to kill a boar, the bullet must be targeted at a particular spot above the eyes and upward at a 20-degree angle, he says.

Reid's conclusion: Humane Society staff should be better trained before they are called into these situations. "I have worked with the Humane Society many times and I have been an expert witness in many cases. They have done good jobs in many situations, but there are some situations where the outcome hasn't been proper and it hasn't been handled well."

Reid is known for his concern about animal welfare. In 1998, he was awarded the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association (OVMA) Award of Merit for co-ordinating efforts to save 20 cows from death or injury in a barn fire. Ironically, Reid was recommended for this award by a humane society.

Neither the OVMA, which is the professional vet association, nor the College of Veterinarians of Ontario, the body that is supposed to protect the public, has a standard for euthanizing animals. The professional association doesn't tell vets how to practice, says spokesperson Nadia Vercillo.

Nor does the CVO prescribe methods that veterinarians can use to put down animals in distress, says assistant registrar Alec Martin -- unless, of course, the college receives a complaint and a practitioner gets called on the carpet for it. Moreover, Better Farming has discovered, it is not unusual for veterinarians to have widely varying opinions on the same situation.

Shopping for vets

St. Ann turkey farmer Paul Vanderzanden, who keeps exotic animals as a hobby, has first-hand experience of the difficulties such disagreements can lead to. "If these people are hell-bent on prosecuting someone, they can find any opinion that they want within the veterinary profession," he says.

Several years ago, the Lincoln County Humane Society, patrolling under contract to West Lincoln Township, seized an emu on his father's farm because it was outside in the winter. Vanderzanden says agents placed the bird at another farm and called a veterinarian. That vet found nothing wrong with the bird. Humane Society agents called a second veterinarian who determined that the bird was underfed and had it transferred to a dog kennel in the local animal shelter.

Subsequently, Paul's father, a prominent local turkey producer and businessman, was charged with cruelty to animals. In court, Vanderzanden's vet and the OSPCA's veterinarian who had declared the birds to be badly treated, disagreed on whether the big birds were properly housed in the winter.

Vanderzanden was ultimately vindicated when the judge found him not guilty. The opinion of his veterinarian, who happened to be Scott Reid, prevailed because he had a lot of experience with ratites, Paul asserts.
Ironically, he adds, Reid was the first veterinarian that the humane society had called. Because the bird was on another farm, he didn't realize it was an animal he had already treated.

Subsequent to that court case, West Lincoln Township appointed Paul Vanderzanden to serve as the township's representative to the Lincoln County Humane Society. Lincoln County Humane Society no longer patrols West Lincoln Township, he says, and the contract was tendered to another humane society with a better understanding of rural standards. The passion that guides some humane society agents and the practicality that guides farmers "are two completely different philosophies," he notes.

Kevin Strooband, manager of the Lincoln County Humane Society, based in St. Catharines, says farmers generally don't treat their animals cruelly. Concerns arise with exotic animals. "If you have something that you never had before, you don't necessarily know how to care for it." He says that "a high percentage of calls" stem from people "just driving by.

"A very high percentage of complaints are unjustified as well," he says.

Henry Swierenga, Ontario Federation of Agriculture member services representative for Niagara, says there may be more humane society complaints about farms in the Niagara area than elsewhere because the region is so highly urbanized. "Urbanites go by and they see something that they don't think should be that way and they don't know how it works. Next thing you know, they call the humane society and the humane society comes and makes reports."

Humane society agents "find a need to impart their wisdom," adds Vanderzanden. "The water bowl is always either too high or too low." And, because they are being judged on their animal husbandry skills by agents who don't know the difference between a cow and a steer, Vanderzanden says, farmers "get their backs up."

The Niagara Peninsula isn't the only place where farmers clash with humane society officials. Last winter, North Bay Humane Society officials attended the dog kennel that Sandy Briggs operates near Powassan in response to a complaint that she was running a puppy mill. While on the farm they asked to look at the herd of cows run by her partner. Briggs says one agent insisted on a closer examination of a cow to see if a trimmed horn was growing back into its head, even though the cow was already pawing the ground with her hoof. "A cow can go either way when she does that," Briggs says. She says the humane society agent protested when Briggs shooed the animal away; she had no appreciation of the possible danger she faced. The Humane Society issued Briggs with a series of orders regarding how she houses her breeding dogs, her boarding dogs and the local pound, that she operates. But Briggs feels the orders are inconsistent and give the agent the power to return to the kennel and farm again and again. She says that in one instance an agent volunteered that she had just come from an animal shelter where dogs were suffering from a disease epidemic.

Steve Lamb, manager at the North Bay and District Humane Society says standard policy is that "we bring a scrub bucket and a jug of chemical and we wash our feet" when entering the property and again when leaving. Disposable coveralls are also part of the protocol as laid down by the OSPCA. "I'm not out there so I'm not positive it happens," Lamb admits.

He says the North Bay agent that was involved in the investigation of Briggs "is long gone." Briggs is now facing an investigation by the Bracebridge Humane Society.

"On the large animal side, they (humane society officials) just don't seem to have the training," veterinarian Reid says. "This could be corrected, but it would take a great deal of effort on their part."

For his part, Ian Duncan, a professor of animal behaviour at the University of Guelph and holder of the university chair on animal welfare, feels that the quick decisions OSPCA officials and veterinarians about whether suffering animals should be put down are often premature.

"You can't tell an animal is suffering "just because it is limping," says Duncan. "Vets tend to make snap decisions with not all that much evidence. I would be a bit concerned about a vet making a decision just on a spur of a moment. I think it takes more evidence than just looking at an animal and deciding - unless, of course, the animal is rolling about in mortal agony and anyone could tell they are suffering."

Duncan says the diagnosis of "suffering" can only be made "by observing the animal over a period of time and finding out if it not only was limping, but whether it was eating and drinking normally, and whether it was interacting in a normal way with its pen mates. If all that was taking place, you would probably be able to say, no it really wasn't suffering at all."

On the other hand, he says, "if the animal was in pain...it would be affecting its whole quality of life and it wouldn't be interacting normally with its pen mates, or it might not be eating normally."

"Defensive training"

Michael Draper, head inspector at the OSPCA, says candidates for agent or inspector positions must have a high school diploma at minimum. "Most people come with special skills." Some have a background in municipal or police law enforcement; some are registered veterinary technicians. Some, for example, have a high level of education in equine care. An agent gets one week's training and is on probation for six months. An inspector gets agent training plus another two weeks and a week of training later, Draper explains.

He says candidates are screened and background checks are performed at the local level and again at OSPCA headquarters. Ongoing training is required in order to keep their positions as OSPCA officers. This summer, some agents got training in body condition scoring for horses, new legislation pertaining to dog care and "defensive training for dealing with difficult people."

Palmer, owner of the boar that was shot, isn't particularly impressed by that education. He grew up on a mixed farm in Nova Scotia, graduated from the Nova Scotia Agriculture College in 1961 and in 1963 from the Ontario Agricultural College, animal husbandry option, with a Bachelor of Science, Agriculture. For a year, he worked as a dairy branch field man with the federal Department of Agriculture in Ottawa before turning to teaching. He retired in 1998 after a 34-year career as a high school biology teacher.

Palmer says he used codes of practice for animal care as teaching tools and he worked extensively with the Ontario Farm Animal Council. As assistant head and head of his school's science department, he ran science clubs for many years. For more than a decade, he was chairman of the Animal Care Committee of the Niagara South Board of Education. As well, he worked with the Ontario Farm Animal Council and the Ontario Sheep Marketing Agency on animal care issues.

Now 62, Palmer has a commercial sheep flock with more than 200 ewes, plus a menagerie of other animals. He is also a director of Rare Breeds Canada and chairs its livestock committee. His farm is home to rare or endangered Shetland, Soay, Newfoundland and Jacob sheep and Newfoundland Ponies, Chantecler and DesChambault chickens and three Large Black pigs, of which there are only 19 in Canada. He has since replaced the boar that was shot with a borrowed boar.

Palmer says he "fancies himself a breeder" and has six adults dogs, including three breeding females. Palmer sells his Border CollieXBorder Terrier puppies to enthusiasts who want a smaller dog for flyball competitions. "I am not a puppy mill," he asserts. His dogs "sell for good money to good people."

Veterinarian Reid says he been to Palmer's farm "many times over the years" to tend these animals. "I know that overall his animals are very well cared for."

So what brought Palmer to the attention of the local humane society? On Mar. 21, 2002, Niagara Falls Humane Society agents followed up on a complaint of "running (a) puppy mill in (a) barn," according to a humane society report, and performed a detailed inspection.

There were no puppies on the farm then, and no orders were issued. "I wasn't all that mad at that at that time" Palmer says.

He thinks humane society officials first came looking for a "puppy mill" because a fellow breeder disapproved of his practice of selling crossbred dogs. The OSPCA defines a puppy mill as "a place where two or more female dogs are frequently bred, primarily for financial gain rather than protection and promotion of breed integrity."

The OFA's Swierenga says Palmer's farm is "not exactly the picture perfect type of farm that we want to use to promote" agriculture, he says.

Palmer admits that the farm he has owned and operated part-time since 1980 is not a showcase operation. Beside the barn sits an old pickup truck that Palmer is disassembling for parts, which he sells. There is old machinery in the yard. "That's just the way it is...around here it's one emergency after another," Palmer says.

How an 800-pound pig walks

Thirteen months after the puppy mill inspection, on April 16, 2003, according to a sworn affidavit presented to Justice of the Peace Larry Pickering, that OSPCA agents Amanda Ellis, John Greer and Randy Felesko, based out of the Welland District Humane Society, attended Palmer's farm following a complaint of "a stallion with a laceration to its hind leg, a ram with its horns growing into its face, dog cages stacked with dogs inside (allowing urine and feces to drop down onto the cages below), the living conditions of other animals inside the barn." The affidavit says "Palmer was very belligerent" and denied the agents access to the barn, but brought animals out for them to observe.

Palmer says there are no stacked dog cages on his farm and no "dripping urine and feces". That is only one of the points in the affidavit with which he vehemently disagrees. "It's all lies," Palmer says.

As for the limping pig, in a cooler moment Palmer says that perhaps the agents "didn't know what they were looking at." Perhaps they didn't realize that the ponderous steps of the boar were simply how an 800-pound pig walks, and not an indication that it was in pain.

He is adamant that he is not going to change that just to please the humane society. "Forty five orders makes me sound like a real criminal," he says.

The 45 orders issued on May 2 are still a stress point for Palmer. He says that, as soon as he received them, inspectors came to his farm "nearly every day" to check if he had complied. Palmer says those visits stopped as soon as he filed an appeal with the Animal Care Review Board.

The appeal, scheduled for May 15, never took place. With the agreement of both Palmer and the OSPCA, the hearing was adjourned sine die, a legal term which means that the matter has been postponed indefinitely but can be brought back before the board on seven days notice. The orders issued May 2 still give humane society officials the power to enter his farm at any time. but Palmer says he won't let them on the property without a warrant.

Palmer asked for a hearing before the review board. However, before that happened he had a meeting with some SPCA and local humane society officials and they mutually agreed to put the issue on hold. A hearing could still be held. In retrospect, Palmer says delaying the hearing was a mistake. The orders that give the Humane Society authority to visit his farm are still in place. "Thing get clearer the further you go along," he says.

"I can't stand not knowing if they are going to pounce on me again," and says he never sleeps through the night. Though Palmer and the affidavit submitted by OSPCA agent Ellis agree that Palmer got angry when the OSPCA agents inquired about lameness in the pig on April 16, Ellis's affidavit is specific about abusive language that Palmer used.

Palmer denies that he used some of those words. "I don't use the 'F' word," he says. He also denies calling OSPCA officers "stupid." School teachers know better than to do that, he says.

The OSPCA officers left. Six days later they returned, a force to be reckoned with, armed with warrant, a veterinarian, a police officer with a gun, and plenty of bullets. BF © copyright 2003 AgMedia Inc..

Outstanding inspectors or "wannabe cops?"

Humane Society agents and inspectors do an outstanding job considering the resources that they have, says Tim Blackwell, a veterinary scientist with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food (OMAF).

"These guys have to do a provincial job and they raise the money to do it," he says, comparing this to the Ontario Provincial Police "running bake sales to buy their radar."

He is also impressed by the powers that OSPCA officers wield. "If they think you are torturing animals today, they don't need a search warrant," says Blackwell.

Since last spring, OMAF has been working with the OSPCA and commodity groups in an extension effort to help veterinarians become better trained and more comfortable in doing OSPCA investigations. Blackwell says that, until a meeting with veterinary practitioners, OSPCA staff and commodity group representatives in the summer, he didn't realize how tough the OSPCA's job was. "They do 15,000 calls a year," Blackwell says. A call resulting in an investigation "might be someone who says their neighbour's dog is tied up in the sun, or it might be 20,000 dead pigs in a manure pit."

The OSPCA and humane society affiliates are the sole agency responsible for enforcing humane laws in the province. The budget is about $10 million, of which some $119,000 comes through the Ontario Ministry of Public Safety and Security, says the OSPCA. That money funds 27 OSPCA shelters, two vet clinics, a wildlife centre and the investigation department. Another 32 affiliated humane societies are separate corporations with their own budgets, says Mike Draper, chief investigator for the OSPCA.

OSPCA-empowered affiliates do not traditionally have expertise in food animals, says Ann Godkin, another OMAF vet who worked in this extension effort.

"There are a whole lot of questions being raised about food animals that aren't being raised in investigating puppy mills," Godkin says.

One key issue is movement of animals. Humane societies generally move animals they consider to be abused to a shelter. When farm animals are in distress, it's hard on them to move, Godkin says. With custom feeding and contract farming, it is also difficult to establish ownership. "You do want to have some communication with the owners before anything is done," she says.

Blackwell says many veterinarians don't like going on calls with the OSPCA and humane society people. "For one thing, they don't necessarily get paid," he says. And he feels that OSPCA-empowered officers "don't get paid enough to take the kind of abuse they get."

Draper adds that some humane societies, especially in urban areas, require investigators to wear body armour for their own safety. In 12 years with the OSPCA, he has been assaulted four times. But Niagara Falls farmer Wendell Palmer says the officers wouldn't get so much abuse if they changed their attitudes. "They are wannabe cops," Palmer says. "They are power tripping." BF © copyright 2003 AgMedia Inc..

Broader OSPCA powers envisaged by federal bill "could really hurt the agriculture industry"

Inspectors and agents of the OSPCA, including affiliated local humane societies, have the powers of police officers for enforcement of the OSPCA Act and the animal cruelty provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada. The OSPCA, and other SPCAs across the country, would like to have broader powers under a proposed federal law now stalled in Parliament.

Bill C10-B will give the courts more discretion in dealing with the worst offenders under the criminal code, says Michael Draper, head inspector at the OSPCA. The existing law only allows a judge to prevent someone from owning animals for up to two years. The new law proposes extending that "for a period up to and including a person's lifetime if the judge feels that is necessary," Draper says.

"We have a number of repeat offenders who have been convicted numerous times here in Ontario," Draper says. "After a two-year prohibition, they are back at neglecting animals."

The current criminal code is "somewhat outdated," Draper says. Some new offenses will be created, such as training dogs to fight. "Departing from the standard of care, which we see often," would also be an offense, he adds. "As we've said all along, it's not going to change industry practices. That's not what criminal law is for." Farm groups aren't so sure. At the Ontario Farm Animal Council, executive director Leslie Ballentine says the federal humane law worded as proposed by the House of Commons "will apply to things that it doesn't apply to now." The definition of an animal has been changed. "It will likely apply to fish for the first time," she says, and "catch and release" angling might be deemed illegal. More importantly, "it takes away defenses that we currently have under the criminal code. It is very legal and very complicated. It could be used to really, really hurt the (agriculture) industry."

The bill is now sitting in limbo on Parliament Hill, the victim of wrangling between the House of Commons and the Senate, which sent the bill back to the Commons with a proposal to soften some of the controversial language. The House of Commons refused to make some key changes and passed it to the Senate again.

With the powers now available under the OSPCA Act, an empowered inspector, agent, veterinarian or a policeman may enter private property where an animal is observed to be in immediate distress. The same powers apply in cases where a Justice of the Peace has issued a search warrant on "reasonable grounds" that an animal is in distress.

Inspectors and agents have the authority to issue written orders and deadlines to the animal caretaker outlining detailed actions that must be taken to relieve distress, including examination by a veterinarian at the expense of the owner. While an order is in force, an inspector or agent has the power to return and examine the animals to determine compliance. If the inspector believes there has been compliance, the order is revoked in writing and the power of entry to check on compliance is withdrawn.

There is an appeal process. The animal owner can appeal orders and animal removals in writing by the owner of the Animal Care Review Board in Toronto within five calendar days.

Once an investigation is begun, the local humane society or the OSPCA keeps a case file on the animal owner. The case file is not open to scrutiny by the owner while an investigation is ongoing. "It would be at our discretion," says Draper. "We are not subject to the freedom of information act currently. We don't normally open our files to the people we investigate, in the same manner that police don't."

The exception is during criminal proceedings. "You have the right to confront your accuser in criminal court," says Draper, "unless it is some way irrelevant or objectionable or (the complaint) is anonymous."

Draper says the OSPCA responds to anonymous complaints. "An informant can call Crimestoppers or make an anonymous complaint directly to us. When it is an animal welfare issue involved, yes, we have to act on it. It would be irresponsible of us not to." BF © copyright 2003 AgMedia Inc..